Aim: The purpose of this study was to assess cognitive vulnerability and response style in clinical and normal individuals.
Method: A sample of 90 individuals was selected for each of the 3 groups of Generalized Anxiety disorder, Dysthymic disorder and normal individuals. They completed MCQ and RSQ.
Results: Results analyzed by MANOVA and post hoc showed significant differences among groups. Dysthymic group and GAD reported higher scores on cognitive confidence compared to the normal group. Individuals with GAD showed highly negative beliefs about need to control thought, compared to the other groups, but in cognitive self-consciousness they have no differences with the normal group. In regard to uncontrollability, danger and positive beliefs, GAD group had higher levels than the other groups. Although normal and GAD group didn't show any significant differences in response style, there was a significant difference between Dysthymic group and other groups in all response styles.
Discussion: Beliefs and meta-cognitive strategies can be distinguished between clinical and non clinical individuals. Also, findings support the Self-Regulatory Executive Function model. ary committee was effective in recognizing, designing and implementing tailored interventions for reduction of medication errors. A systematic approach is urgently needed to decrease organizational susceptibility to errors, through providing required resources to monitor, analyze and implement effective interventions.